[Pacemaker] Trouble getting two node cluster to failover when network lost

Aaron Wilson awilson at nautilusgrp.com
Wed Mar 19 16:23:28 EDT 2014

Stefan, thanks for the reply.

Having two nics is not for redundancy in my case. Resources on the primary
server are being accessed from both subnets at the same time. The secondary
server is  to be a failover if the server goes down or if any of the
Ethernet ports become disconnected for any reason.  I read through the
documentation and I am still not sure of the relationship between the
Corosync hostnames / interfaces and Pacemaker resources.  Could corosync be
configured to detect failure and start failover of a node using rrp or does
the resource need to be monitored by Pacemaker in order to get moved form
primary to secondary server?

There is actually a third nic on the servers which could be used only for
cluster communication if that works better.

Thanks again for your input. I will do some more reading as well.

- Aaron
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.clusterlabs.org/pipermail/pacemaker/attachments/20140319/1fc0aa1c/attachment-0003.html>

More information about the Pacemaker mailing list